| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
2.3 pm
Mr. John McFall (Dumbarton): I am delighted to be here to give the Scottish perspective on the drugs problem. I recall the phrase, "If you remember the 1960s, you weren't there." I do remember the 1960s, which shows my conformity or lack of adventure. That phrase shows that drugs have been with us for quite a time.
Drugs know no borders. Two short years ago, I was in the Huagua valley in Peru watching people collect drugs and I realised that the drugs would end up on the streets of Edinburgh, Birmingham and London. There is an international perspective. I welcome the coalescence of the views of Government and Opposition on the problem.
In Scotland, the number of drugs crimes has increased since the Government came to power from 1,000 to 20,000--an increase of 1,500 per cent. The Government have engaged in discussions with the Opposition parties in Scotland to bring into life the Scotland Against Drugs campaign, which I shall mention later. The scale of the problem in Scotland, as in England and Wales, is a cause for the utmost concern.
A recent World Health Organisation study in Glasgow, which was jointly funded by the Medical Research Council, showed that Glasgow, not untypically for our major cities, has an estimated 10,000 injecting drug users. A study by the Greater Glasgow health board estimated that some 12,000 Glasgow patients are considered by their GPs to be misusing drugs. Scottish society views the problem of drug misuse not as a free-standing issue but as a continuing, socially destructive problem that cuts across the social and economic spectrum in Scotland. That is the reason for the coalescence of views.
A good example was the Licensing (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, which came before the House a few months ago. It was designed to deal with raves in Scotland. It received its Second Reading in Glasgow in the Scottish Grand Committee on Monday 18 December. That was a poignant occasion, because on the previous Tuesday in Strathclyde, the 100th drug fatality had taken place: a young boy of 21 called Mark Hutcheson, who lived in Old Kilpatrick on the border of my constituency. He did not die at a rave but at home in his brother's arms, trying to rid himself of the craving for temazepam and Ecstasy. Another death, another family and community left devastated.
Drugs deflower our youth. The raves Bill was prompted by the three deaths at the Hangar 13 nightclub in Ayr. The Grand Committee took evidence from people in Glasgow,
Inverness and Ayr. The professionals and people on the ground had conflicting views. There was no one, simple message. That is a lesson for politicians. The "Just say no" campaign is no good in itself because the problem is multifaceted. I remember the Department of Health's "Heroin screws you up" campaign of 10 years ago. That was launched on a wave of hopeful publicity only for retreat in disarray to follow when research revealed that the central figure--a cartoon character who starts off wholesome, affluent and confident only to sink into the trough of hopeless drug addiction despite his repeated claims that he can handle it--had the unintentional effect of turning young people on.
We have learnt in those 10 years. The raves Bill recommended chill-out areas in nightclubs, not because we condone drugs but because of the reality. In recommending them, we realised that there is a fine line between encouraging drugs and encouraging people not to take them. Given the scale of the problem, the risk is worth taking.
I also commend the Government on the co-operation they extended during our consideration of the raves Bill. It is a three-clause Bill, but having taken evidence, we realised that clause 1, the main clause, was defective. The Minister of State, myself and others reconsidered the Bill and tabled a new clause so that the Bill can help local authorities to deal with the problem. That Bill is an example of the parties working in tandem in the hope of formulating something worth while.
The Scotland Against Drugs campaign has eschewed the just say no philosophy. It is important to note that it involves no preaching or moral crusade. Young people see their friends taking Ecstasy and they think that it is safe, but it is not. We must get across its unpredictability.
Research has been conducted by the John Hopkins university in America on the effects of Ecstasy on rats and monkeys. It found that the neurons in the brain that produce the chemical serotonin, which helps to regulate mood, appetite, sleep and other functions, are affected by Ecstasy. It provides indirect evidence to suggest that one Ecstasy tablet damages the brain cells that produce that chemical. The key question for the researchers was whether the brain recovers from the effects of the Ecstasy tablet and they found that that of monkeys and rats did not recover.
It is clear that a young person can take one Ecstasy tablet, just like Leah Betts, and find, sadly, that it is one tablet too much. Our campaign is focusing on that unpredictability. We recognise young people's life style and we do not want to spoil it, but do they realise the implications of taking Ecstasy? The good research undertaken on cigarettes has meant that the health education message has got across, which has had a good effect on the country. The drugs campaign could have the same effect.
Mr. Flynn:
I am sorry to interrupt my hon. Friend, but we are sending out a dangerously false message. I, too, quoted the research that has been conducted on the effects of Ecstasy on neurons of the brain. It is wrong to say that Leah Betts died from Ecstasy. If she had taken Ecstasy on its own she would have been okay; if she had taken water on its own she would have been okay. It was the combination of the two that killed her. We are giving out the wrong message if we say to young people that they
Mr. McFall:
I realise that Leah Betts drank too much water, but that proves the unpredictability of Ecstasy and the need for us to deal with the reality. My hon. Friend's comments may have intellectual, academic, lecture room validity, but they are shattered on the streets and in today's environment. In this debate we are trying to deal with the reality.
My hon. Friend also spoke about the Dutch policy on soft drugs. I take as my bible the 1994 Scottish Select Committee report, which I commend, on soft drugs and the Dutch policy. Members of that Committee visited Amsterdam and other cities, and they concluded:
Scottish Television hopes to undertake an initiative in November. It is electronically linking every secondary school in Scotland, engaging each school in a debate, putting questions and receiving instant answers electronically, so that young people have the opportunity to tell the rest of society what the position is and to debate among themselves.
The Scotland Against Drugs campaign is a broad spectrum, ranging from people who advocate harm reduction to those who advocate elimination. That is a fraught position; in the past, drugs campaigners have been split. That is where the weakness has been, so the campaign aims to keep them together.
Mr. David Bryce is a member of the Secretary of State's campaign committee--I recommended him personally. He is in charge of the Calton Athletic recovery group. I agree with the comments on the film "Trainspotting". Far from glamorising drugs, it shows what deprivation and paucity there is for people involved in drugs. The end of the film states that Calton Athletic will receive some of the film's profits.
David Bryce and his colleagues go about the country spreading their message. They aim
On Monday, I introduced an Adjournment debate on suicides in Cornton Vale prison. Report after report has clearly shown the link between the incidence of drug taking and unemployment and deprivation. In our drug policies, we should have a twin-track approach. We should have the all-party approach on harm reduction and recognise the social dimension.
The debate was about Angela Bollan, a young girl aged 19, who was drug dependent. She ended up on remand in Cornton Vale prison for women in Scotland. She wrote to her parents the day before, seemingly bubbly, saying that she would like to see them in a few days' time. Sadly, she did not make it.
At her funeral in Alexandria, the Rev. Ian Millar gave a commentary on her and young children. He said:
"We are totally opposed to any experimentation with the Dutch approach to cannabis in Scotland. No large scale study of cannabis use has been carried out in the Netherlands and it is not therefore possible to draw any conclusions as to whether separating the supply of soft drugs from that of hard drugs . . . has had any effect on either cannabis use or on the decline in recruitment to heroin use. The successes which are claimed for the Dutch experiment could equally be accounted for by the success of education programmes and changes in youth fashions. At a time when Scotland faces a massive drug problem we believe that any move to decriminalise cannabis would send the wrong signal to young people."
That is the message that we wish to send out from our debate. That is why the Scotland Against Drugs campaign involves many people, including those in the media. The Evening Times of Glasgow has launched a campaign on which I congratulate it. We now have our own badge and logo. The campaign also involves sports personalities and young people to whom young people can relate. They do not relate to grey-haired, middle-aged politicians going around Scotland lecturing them. I have four children and trying to do that with them would fail. If it would fail for me and my kids, it would fail for the rest of society, so we engage people with whom young people can communicate and who are role models. The campaign has undertaken that.
"to deglamorise something that does have an attraction for young people. The campaigners' street credibility is high because they themselves are former users. Their workshop presentation has a catchy title--Cannabis to Chaos."
21 Jun 1996 : Column 1174
It is important for us to remember that title. There is a linear progression. David Bryce said:
That message is being spread today on Glasgow's streets. The Labour Front-Bench team and, I am sure, the Government endorse it.
"You have to admit that there is a fun element, but it doesn't last long. We explain about how the body builds up tolerances. We explain the effects on the family. We give them something to think about--about how others around them are getting hurt. By the time we finish they know about the real life of the user, the damage to their family, theft, prison, the police, HIV and hepatitis C."
"many hundreds of good and decent children are thrown on to the scrapheap of unemployment. The future to them seems devoid of any worth and meaning. Is it any wonder that many seek alternatives which might lift the gloom even if only for a moment.
We do not wish that cynicism to enter young people's souls any more. That is why the Opposition are delighted to share with the Government in this debate and to put that message across. The main message is that we cannot do it alone. We will do it only together as a society. That is the message from the House of Commons today.
I see a metamorphosis before my eyes. That catastrophic change which occurs when the bright and smiling youngsters of the primary school realise that their hopes and dreams of early years cannot be fulfilled. Despite the positive efforts of the school to promote their self-esteem, cynicism enters their soul and they give up on the system."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |